Screenshot of the day: Proteomics apologizes to PubMed’s readership.

Last time I said: Although the paper was retracted from the online version of Proteomics, you can still make historical screenshots on the PubMed version. Now the chance is over. But what is really funny: finally, PubMed ‘Related Links’ algorithm gives us the proper context of the Warda-Han-Mighty paper, just take a look at the… Continue reading Screenshot of the day: Proteomics apologizes to PubMed’s readership.

Nature’s Great Beyond on the Warda-Han-Proteomics-Creator paper

Peer review, ‘a mighty creator’ and an almighty row However the paper was only retracted for “a substantial overlap of the content of this article with previously published articles in other journals.”, not for the strange “mighty creator” line. Peer review isn’t perfect but you’d hope it would catch something like this.

Warda speaks: “We say the truth, I not burrow any sentences from others.”

The Warda-Han-Proteomics saga continues and finds its way to the show/entertainment business. We’ve already listened to Han, now it’s time for Warda to speak, which he did in an email to James Randerson over at the Guardian Science blog, which makes think (indeed ‘rethink’ as W suggests) that the Warda-Han pair is probably the Laurel… Continue reading Warda speaks: “We say the truth, I not burrow any sentences from others.”

The Warda-Han-Proteomics scandal: fingerprints of plagiarism, too

We have now a well-developed and sad case example of irresponsible scientific editing and publishing: the Warda-Han advanced online paper by the academic journal Proteomics: Mitochondria, the missing link between body and soul: Proteomic prospective evidence. What started as an abstract-based hunch and question about the quality of a recent review, addressed to and amplified… Continue reading The Warda-Han-Proteomics scandal: fingerprints of plagiarism, too

The fingerprints of a mighty creator in Proteomics, impact factor >5

Creationism/intelligent design is not really an issue for me as I am a biologist working with mitochondria and stem cells, also a life extension supporter, whose angle on things and projections are based on the recent advancements in science and technology. As far as I know, creationism/ID neither suggests any new experiments or heuristic solutions… Continue reading The fingerprints of a mighty creator in Proteomics, impact factor >5

Can you tell a good article from a bad based on the abstract and the title alone?

Many times people only have access to the abstract of peer-review articles, and nothing more. There are different abstract styles (sometimes they’re going too far or on the contrary) in the literature and I’d be curious to hear about your opinion on the following review abstract and title. I became interested and suspicious reading these… Continue reading Can you tell a good article from a bad based on the abstract and the title alone?